I have been trying to nail the Kveik pseudo-lager for a while now. It is a process at this point but the idea of doing lagers fast is super appealing to me. So today we talked to Ryan Pachmayer BJCP Judge and beer writer about making the pseudo-lager. From the classic hybrid to fermenting under pressure there are tons of ways brewers are getting lager-like beers without having to do lager temps. Give it a listen!
I’ll be watching to see how this thread goes. I brew a lot of lagers and even though I looked at some of the “fast lager” stuff, I concluded that lagers are just better when they have had the chance to sit cold for a good 8 weeks. I am occasionally pressed to get one into service earlier than that and the beer is good but it’s much better if it sits and I try it again a week later, two weeks later, etc. As long as I plan far enough out, I can brew one and let it lager and bring it out when it’s at its best. I realize that with the Kviek yeast none of this may apply but I will be curious about how the lagers taste in comparison to lagers made with true lager yeast.
Skimmed the transcript, think I might listen before I give the “warm butter method” a try.
I haven’t really enjoyed 34/70 when I’ve tried it at warmer temperatures. Bayern Lager is supposed to be good up to 62, but I’ve been keeping it at the lower end of the range.
WLP 029 at 15c-18c gives very clean beers. So does wyeast 1007.
I have a lutra kviek beer on tap which is cleanish, but it’s not as clean as the above 2 ale yeast strains.
I think the beauty of kviek strains is that your fermentation fridge can be free to brew lagers at cold temps for weeks while you brew other beers in the garage at high temps while you’re waiting for your lager to brew nice and cold.
I keep telling myself that one of these days I’m going to ferment a lager with Nottingham at 11 degrees C., but somehow when push comes to shove I can’t quite actually bring myself to do it. Lallemand says you can use Nottingham at as low as 10 degrees C.
All the kveik “lagers” I’ve had don’t taste or feel much like a lager. I won’t pretend to be well versed in them but for what I’ve had I think you get a cleaner beer fermenting 3470 warm or Cal Ale cold.
Lutra is pretty clean and drops bright with a little time after cold crashing. I wonder if anyone has tried it or other pseudo lager Kveik strains fermented under pressure? Ester suppression?
That’s what I was wondering. I will be giving it a go in my Motueka Pils at 15 PSI in a couple of months.
I don’t understand this at all when people say this. Kolsch is basically a lager, and the only thing that sets it apart from one is the esters from the yeast. Meaning, yeast esters make the beer. So how can one say its clean, Kolsch isn’t clean, so how can using a Kolsch yeast be clean?
Have you ever wandered around Köln (Cologne)?
Some Kölsch is eatery, some is clean, some is malty, some has hop aroma, one was phenolic.
Not all of the yeasts labeled as Kölsch yeast are estery.
But thats not the point, the point is specifically 029. Are you saying 029 is not estery?
Oh, OK.
I don’t know, I’ve never used it. I’ve never brewed a Kölsch. Plenty of Altbiers though, using 1007, which is clean.
I lived in Germany and often go back. Kölsch is OK, but just about my least favorite German style. Give me an Altbier. Or a Pils, or any lager in Bavaria.
I will bow out now and keep brew my Dunkel.
Oh, OK.
I don’t know, I’ve never used it. I’ve never brewed a Kölsch. Plenty of Altbiers though, using 1007, which is clean.
I lived in Germany and often go back. Kölsch is OK, but just about my least favorite German style. Give me an Altbier. Or a Pils, or any lager in Bavaria.
I will bow out now and keep brew my Dunkel.
I don’t get any esters from 029 fermented cool. If I’m making a kolsh I use wyeast 2565.
Make a lightly hopped blonde ale with 029, fermented cool and see what you think. It’s my house yeast now. Clean clean clean
W34 fermented in low 60s ends up pretty clean as long as you give it time.
I do, its a Kolsch and the white wine esters are very apparent.
Serious question, what is the difference between a wort fermented with a bottom fermenting yeast and held cold for 2, 4, 6, 8 weeks? In other words when you say it’s much better at 8 weeks, why, what is the difference between the 8, 6, 4, 2? Can you actually taste this difference? What is changing in the beer that makes it better and better and better…
I’m not being an arse but truly curious.
Maybe an exbeeriment submission is necessary or I should go read that Lager book again.
First, there really is no such thing as top or bottom fermenting yeast AFAIK. I’m sure Mark will correct me if I’m incorrect.
What happens as the beer sits cold is that yeast and polyphenols drop out of it, giving it a cleaner crisper taste and mouthfeel. Whether that takes 2,4,6 or 8 weeks is up to the individual beer and brewer.
Cool, I just don’t notice any at all when I brew with it. I get much more from the wyeast kolsh.
Top and bottom fermenting AFAIK are just historical descriptive terms telling where the yeast is harvested or where it tends to suspend during fermentation. A top fermenting yeast would be harvested from the top of the fermentation (think like 1318) where a bottom fermenting yeast would tend to be harvest from the yeast cake and suspended throughout the wort. There are many slightly varying explanations for these terms but traditionally AFAIK that’s what they refer to and “bottom fermenting” would refer to a lager yeast.
That’s why I used the term “bottom fermenting”.
But I’m not so much interested in such mundane historical technicalities.
I’ve heard that the yeast and polyphenols are dropping out but is there a noticeable taste difference from one week to the next?